IS-2

[Butcher]

No IS-2, we have enough tanks that park on concrete and don't move. Kids won't let them leave safe ground so there is no sense in having it.

[tunnelrat]

Until they model spalling, there is no point in having anything other than the uber-Tigers...

We can sit here and talk about armor thickness and degrees of slope all day... read up on how crews of Tigers fared when their tank ate a 122mm or 152mm HE round.

[Butcher]

Until they model spalling, there is no point in having anything other than the uber-Tigers...

We can sit here and talk about armor thickness and degrees of slope all day... read up on how crews of Tigers fared when their tank ate a 122mm or 152mm HE round.

At short range both 122 and 152 did incredible damage, putting a Tiger/KT out of action.

[kilo2]

152 shooting HE could kill the crew by the pressure of the round alone.

[wil3ur]

They should really model in headaches from rounds...  Can you imagine taking 10 or 15 75MM rounds upside the turret and what that had to soundlike to the guys inside that giant bell if they were bouncing?  Good lord!

[matt]

+1

[tunnelrat]

They should really model in headaches from rounds...  Can you imagine taking 10 or 15 75MM rounds upside the turret and what that had to soundlike to the guys inside that giant bell if they were bouncing?  Good lord!

They do, anytime Midjami is talking on 200 it's because someone is getting hit with 10 to 15 75mm rounds upside the turret 

[Denniss]

It's a common myth all IS-2 had a uniformly sloped frontal armor section - in fact the first series up to summer 1944 had the hull from the IS-1 with an enlarged turret to mount the 122mm gun. Only then they began producing the uniformly sloped frontal armor, this vehicle is often called IS-2 model 1944 (neither IS-2m nor IS-2M).
Both IS-1 and the early IS-2 had unexpected high loss rates, after inspecting destroyed tanks they identified the weak spot in the stepped frontal armor and eliminated it.

[guncrasher]

They should really model in headaches from rounds...  Can you imagine taking 10 or 15 75MM rounds upside the turret and what that had to soundlike to the guys inside that giant bell if they were bouncing?  Good lord!

he would've been dead from the first round.


semp

[Karnak]

Semp, that crap isn't going to stop untill GV's have as much chance as the aircraft does to get away.

Conversely, it won't stop until tanks don't have the option to do it either.  I am certain that many airplane drivers would also utilize such a tool if they could.

I will also note that many aircraft are not very capable of getting away, though not the perked ones obviously.

[Tank-Ace]

Karnak, what you simply fail to grasp time and again is that GV's are fundamentally different from aircraft, and that by nessecity, solutions to their problems will be fundamentally different. If that means flackers kill as many aircraft as aircraft do GV's..... well then it does, and thats all.

GV's weren't put in the game to serve as targets for those lacking the skills to achieve A2A kills. If you want to bomb, HTC has already provided numerous targets for that purpose.

This being so, NOBODY'S gameplay hinges being able to bomb GV's; those that divebomb GV's can divebomb town buildings and hangers, and likely contribute more to the overall game play by doing so.

Those that hunt the bombers can still hunt the bombers.

Furballers can still furball in the ensuing fight.

Etc.


Karnak, you're pissed you got killed fair and square, although in an admitedly gamey manner, we get it. But stop acting like a petulant 4yr old, and deal with the problem. Start your own thread asking for the icon range of flackers to be increased, instead of snipping in on GV threads with your poorly reasoned, and fundamentally flawed arguments.

[Karnak]

I actually don't want the icon range extended.  I never asked for it to be extended.  You and the other mudders have persistently assigned that position to me, but I have never held it.  I have only held that friendly aircraft should have the same range limits on GV icons as hostile aircraft.  Nothing less, nothing more.

[Tank-Ace]

Then post a wish for that. You so rarely state what you want, that its no wonder we don't know what your goals are.

Most of your recent posts on the subject have been just support for "Nerf the GV's, they're too hard to bomb  " threads.

[MK-84]

GV's are still very easy to bomb. 

The best part is though....with the patch they CAN be very hard to spot, and thus very hard to destroy.

I find most GV'ers tooling about making no attempt to stop (which halves range) or hiding under a tree (which removes your icon)  They now have a very useful tool, but most appear to ignore this.

[AHTbolt]

GV's weren't put in the game to serve as targets for those lacking the skills to achieve A2A kills. If you want to bomb, HTC has already provided numerous targets for that purpose.

Gv's are not special or immune from bombs or being strafed. The biggest threat German tanks faced were not other tanks but aircraft, that's why the Germans were forced to travel at night. And I don't think the lankstuka is right either, but being bombed is one of the problems GVs face.